yoyofandomcom-20200223-history
Coffee Machine
Just add your 2 cents at the top. :-) Topics moved: User Interface Discussion Archived discussions: see Archived Coffee Machine Sep2005 Current Topics July 20 *I love to revist old topics. But we need to figure out what to do about reviews v.s. info about the yo-yo. Should we keep those pages seperate? There are some yo-yo pages that contain no review info such as Anti-Yo Eetsit. It is listed under the category of "review" but it's all just yo-yo stats.--Josh Parker 12:54, 20 July 2006 (PDT) July 17 *Just to let you know, I noticed there is a javascript error. Firefox says it is line 31. Seems like there's a "What's Hot in the yo-yo wiki" where the apostrophy is interfering with those surrounding the string. ShawnF 17:32, 17 July 2006 (PDT) **Thanks Shawn, on what page did you see that error? --Josh Parker 12:50, 20 July 2006 (PDT) June 20 *I've added an infobox to the Anti-Yo Fluchs page. What do people think of it? Is the colour scheme good? If people are happy we can roll it out to all the other yo-yo pages. --Wilfred (talk| ) 09:20, 20 June 2006 (PDT) *I love it :) --Josh Parker 17:14, 20 June 2006 (PDT) May 24 *Usability review - I'm having a look at the page layout and trying to work out whether any pages aren't reachable within say three clicks of the front page (and special pages -> all pages -> specific page doesn't count ;-). This should help us to decide how to improve what pages are linked on the front page. For example, it's not obvious where to find info on crews. Thoughts guys? May 7 *I'm thinking of changing the sidebar, removing 'community portal' and 'current events' and adding the coffee machine and the yo-yo wiki news in their place. What do people think? Also, what shall I name the coffee machine as, should it be 'discussion', 'talk', 'chat' or just 'coffee machine'? Finally, what order should I put things in? --Wilfred (talk| ) 06:35, 7 May 2006 (PDT) **I'm also thinking of rewording the tooltips (the blue boxes that pop up when you put you mouse over them) in the sidebar, any thoughts? --Wilfred (talk| ) 06:39, 7 May 2006 (PDT) **The changes to the sidebar are long overdue. :) I would keep the name 'Coffee Machine' and make its tooltip something like 'General discussion about current topics.' --HB 08:47, 9 May 2006 (PDT) ***The links are in, I'm still trying to figure out how to get the tooltips working. --Wilfred (talk| ) 14:21, 24 May 2006 (PDT) May 5 *The store category looks like a good idea. --HB 05:18, 5 May 2006 (PDT) May 1 *Please have a look at the Category Proposals page and give your opinion. --Wilfred (talk| ) 10:37, 1 May 2006 (PDT) April 27 * I tried reuploading some of my images. However I always get an error, that some file cannot be copied. One other way of reuploading is to use a second filename, e.g. with an underscore. Not nice, but it seems to work like I have done with the anatomy diagram in Ball Bearings. What do you think. Is this the way to go? --HB 14:05, 27 April 2006 (PDT) **It's the only way to go at the moment. The image path is set wrong, the server can't find the old images so you can't re-upload them. If you upload a new image it works fine though. Hopefully Derek will fix it soon. --Wilfred (talk| ) 00:41, 28 April 2006 (PDT) April 21 * Take note that this page, for this first time since I started, has no red/uncreated links. Let's see how long it lasts, since I am investigating a couple of others that are proving quite hard to piece together. My guess is that we are probably 85-95% there with the names, although some of the entries do need some more work. Then again, there may be a couple that are just completely lost in the mists of time... --Jaco 09:22, 21 April 2006 (PDT) ** Great job. There's nothing wrong with red links IMO but having all this fantastic information is great. --Wilfred (talk| ) 10:12, 21 April 2006 (PDT) April 20 *I've added the new CSS decoration stuff. I think it looks good, but of course it can be edited (although I'm not CSS guru) or completely removed. Your personal tools are moved to the sidebar, tabs are rounded (only in some browsers, not IE) and everything is polished a little. Thoughts/opinions/flames? --Wilfred (talk| ) 13:07, 20 April 2006 (PDT) ** Not bad, although my "what links here" link is now way down below and I need to scroll to get to it. Minor irritation since I do use it quite a lot. --Jaco 09:22, 21 April 2006 (PDT) ***Ok. What resolution are you on? It's not an issue I experience, but it would be an awful pain to change. Anything else? --Wilfred (talk| ) 10:12, 21 April 2006 (PDT) **** 1024x768, Firefox under XP. Since you did ask - the links in the various menus are a bit hard to see now since they are gray. Maybe a blue with a gray tint would be better. --Jaco 10:38, 21 April 2006 (PDT) ***** As you can see they're black on mouseover but I could just make them black the whole time. What do you think? --Wilfred (talk| ) 00:25, 22 April 2006 (PDT) ****** I spent quite some time editing yesterday, and my eyes got sore from the gray. Not sure if black is such a good idea, since it doesn't quite look like a link - plus when a tab is active, the link shows up as black, so we'll miss that distinction. --Jaco 01:22, 22 April 2006 (PDT) *******I could make the tab bold - in fact I might do that anyway to make it clearer. Can you suggest a colour to replace the grey? --Wilfred (talk| ) 03:59, 23 April 2006 (PDT) ******** Blue with gray tint, something like #222299 --Jaco 04:26, 23 April 2006 (PDT) ********* That's pretty dark. I'll test it when I can and get some screenshots of it in action. April 19 *This comes as part of a response on the Dark Magic review, since the review in question is not the actual culprit, while a lot of others are. Basically this comes down to a discussion I had with Wilfred around keeping the subjective integrity intact, while adding some real objective integrity. Looking at the current state of reviews, I'm quite dismayed. There are no standards, a lack of real facts and just a lot of subjective gumpf for the most part. Since I've been spending a lot of my time under the manufacturers, I'm quite unhappy when I follow a link from a carefully crafted page and don't come up with any facts apart from "d00dZ, th1s yo-yo is l33t". We need a way to show actual facts about the yo-yo in question and then have a specific section for subjective "review" parts. (The G&E2 review is close to perfect and lanceallen is doing some great work with the rest.) What I'm suggesting/advocating is a specific template, like we have with stores. As an intro it covers the release date and generally the people involved. Moving into the specifications it shows the shape, weight, metareial, value, etc. much like what we have on the yo-yo museum. Some manufacturer links comes next. Then we have a section for subjective reviews where people can play without disturbing the harmony. Same may even go for the manufacturers, since this week I've had a comment on YoTech (underappreciated, etc.) that I moved to the talk page, intact. Didn't quite know what to do with it apart from the fact that it was not only in the wrong section, but also completely out of place. Comments? Thoughts? (And no, I'm not volunteering yet, still very busy getting the last couple manufacturers sorted out and then they need to be fleshed-out in parts and cleaned-up a bit more... and... and...) --Jaco 09:06, 19 April 2006 (PDT) **There are a couple of issues here. Firstly, we need a template to show how to lay out pages. Every yo-yo page should have some basic info, then a title to show where the facts stop and the opinions begin. The standards tend to improve when people have a rough idea of what it should look like. Ideally, we'd have a minimum and max length (the review here is massive). The biggest problem is that reviews are very hard to edit. How do I edit a review if someone rates a yo-yo 3 star and I only rate it 2 star out of 5? I've only made spelling/grammar edits to the reviews because it's someone else's opinion. As for what's been happening on the YoTech, what you did was fine. Manufacturer reviews won't do anyone much good so I think we should just get the guy to submit reviews for specific yo-yos. A wiki doesn't mean you can annotate as you want. Finally, the yo-yo museum is great and I think we could link loads of yo-yo pages to the relavent yo-yo museum page - it would act as a great source for images. --Wilfred (talk| ) 13:06, 19 April 2006 (PDT) ***If we could get weight, bearing size, and size information about all these yo-yos that would rock as solid as Yo-yo Wiki should. But review implies that it will be about what the person thought about it too. Should we just have an opinion based section on every yo-yo for anyone to write a review about it? That could result in several reviews for each yo-yo, but that wouldn't really be all that bad. --Josh Parker 16:50, 19 April 2006 (PDT) ****Interesting point - perhaps we should rename it as 'yo-yo library'. The review should only be a section of the page, I think facts are more useful to people who are interested in purchasing one. --Wilfred (talk| ) 12:38, 20 April 2006 (PDT) ***** I like it. --Jaco 05:11, 21 April 2006 (PDT) April 15 *Video links - we seem to be getting quite a few video links recently. I don't want the hosts to get upset about 'bandwidth theft' so I think we should do it as "video link (hosted by XYZ)" so we can link directly but show who is hosting. --Wilfred (talk| ) 02:02, 15 April 2006 (PDT) April 6 *I've worked out how to implement a CSS styles here so I can tweak the way the yo-yo wiki looks. We could do a trial run to see if you like it. My preference is for the 'milky' style (screenshots http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Milky.png http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Milkyedit.png). Shall I go ahead with it? --Wilfred (talk| ) 01:50, 6 April 2006 (PDT) **It doesn't seem to be a huge change. I say go for it, and we can see if we like it. --lanceallen 09:58, 7 April 2006 (PDT) ***As I'm going on holiday tomorrow, so I'll run the test when I get back in case people want it to be changed in some way. You're right, it's not a major colour scheme change but it is a bit slicker IMO. --Wilfred (talk| ) 13:46, 7 April 2006 (PDT) March 27 * I've posted some photos that are fairly large, like the ones here: Hspin Good and Evil 2: Poison. Wilfred mentioned that they might be too big. Does anyone else feel this way? I personally like larger images. --lanceallen 14:14, 27 March 2006 (PST) March 24 * We have a list of manufacturers here and we have a different list of manufacturers on what is currently called the Reviews page. We have a list of yo-yos each manufacturer makes on their individual page and we have a similar list on the reviews page. There is some redundancy going on here that is going to cause problems in the future. The integrity of the data of these lists is going to go down having them in multiple locations. I think we should have one page just like the current reviews page, that lists all manufacturers and each yo-yo they produced. We already have a "yo-yos" page, so my thought is to retitle our current reviews page to "Manufacturers Yo-Yos and Reviews". We then eliminate the manufacturers page and remove the list of yo-yos from each individual manufacturers page, and direct them to the main list. I know my proposed page will be very long (the reviews page already is), but I think it will be better and keep our data integrity much higher. Please share your comments. --lanceallen 12:43, 24 March 2006 (PST) **I see your point, but the pages are big as is and I don't think they should get any bigger. The separation of reviews of the yo-yo and the manufacturers themselves seem logical to me, do you agree? The redundany seems to be where we put the list of who makes what yo-yo. This seems to me to be best to put on the appropriate manufacturers page. We can then remove the non-existant page links on the reviews page so it is what the title says; a list of the yo-yo reviews. How does that sound? --Wilfred (talk| ) 14:12, 24 March 2006 (PST) *** I don't really agree with your comments and I still like my proposed changes, but it's all good. I wish there were more people to chime in on this. Does anyone one else have an opinion? --lanceallen 14:14, 27 March 2006 (PST) ***Allow me to try to make things clearer. The reviews page should just be a list of reviews. The only reason it seems like a list of yo-yo produced is due to the number of red links and the fact is is broken up by manufacturer. The red links should be relocated to a yo-yos produced section of the specific manufacturer. We would then only have a full list on the manufacturer page. It's not perfect but I think it works. What about that then? --Wilfred (talk| ) 01:58, 6 April 2006 (PDT) **** I agree with Wilfred. In the end of the day the manufacturers list is the definative list, the reviews section should only contain the pages which contain actrual subjective reviews, and this will mostly only be for the newer yo-yos. --Jaco 09:12, 19 April 2006 (PDT) March 10th *I've slightly modified a skin I got from wikipedia that I think would look great here. It looks good in IE and brilliant in firefox. Find it here. Have a look at it and tell me whether you think it would look good here. --Wilfred (talk| ) 12:10, 10 March 2006 (PST) March 1st * We must be doing something right :-) --Wilfred (talk| ) 12:41, 1 March 2006 (PST) *Uploads are back online... Still working to restore the missing images information to the DB. B3Kid 12:07, 1 March 2006 (PST) **Glad to see the logo has reappeared :-D. I see we now have a text box below the edit buttons, is this intentional? --Wilfred (talk| ) 12:44, 1 March 2006 (PST) February 22nd *There is an actual tool for the Wiki, which will go through the DB, and rebuild all images. However I can not run the tool, until I am at a PC that I can get direct SSH access to the server shell. The exact issue that I located is in the Wiki Database, specifically with the images table. While you may notice some fake thumbs showing up now, the image still isn't present. This is due to a large amount of data missing with in the Database about the image. A remedy should be very very soon!B3Kid 13:04, 22 February 2006 (PST) February 21st * Maybe the source of our problems is that the wiki was restored to a different path? I noticed that a few days ago our url was /index.php . Now we have /wiki/index.php ? --HB 05:00, 21 February 2006 (PST) **Dunno. However, most images are now viewable if you click the link, but they don't appear on the page they are linked to. B3Kid/Josh - we seem to have lost a lot of settings when we upgraded - uploads have been disabled. --Wilfred (talk| ) 07:27, 21 February 2006 (PST) *B3Kid - well done on the backup resoration, we have only lost three images which I can re-upload :-). Can you confirm that we haven't lost anything else? *Yep HB you are correct on that issue, I did not move the images folder over from the previous installation into the new installation during the upgrade, and thats how the image folder was lost. I do see that the images are viewable with a click, but that just wont do. Unfortunetly I think it is stupid that most of the configuration changes have been lost, and that MediaWiki dosn't offer a configuration file upgrade. I'm looking into why images will not display on the site, and hope to have an answer to that shortly. B3Kid 11:30, 21 February 2006 (PST) **Some digging yeilded that this is a common upgrade issue, and the documentation is like that of most MediaWiki documentation, horrible. I do have a couple things to try when I get a chance to connect to the WikiServer. B3Kid 11:46, 21 February 2006 (PST) ***I notice that the College for the Easily Amused page has its image working. I think it's becuase the MIME type is image/JPEG for that image, whereas most of the other images have a MIME type of unkown/unknown. Re-uploading might work, but that is currently disabled. --Wilfred (talk| ) 01:14, 22 February 2006 (PST) February 19th *Is it just my machine or do we have a problem with images? --HB 06:17, 18 February 2006 (PST) **No, it has to do with the wiki upgrade, I think images just have to be turned back on. I'll get b3 to figure it out. --Josh Parker 06:23, 18 February 2006 (PST) **Yup, we have a problem with images. Unregistered users can contribute again - that should be dealt with before the spam returns... :-\ --Wilfred 06:34, 18 February 2006 (PST) ***Fixed the login thing. --Josh Parker 16:12, 18 February 2006 (PST) **Backup on Mabus Servers confirmed. Waiting to find exact date of local backup. B3Kid 19:11, 18 February 2006 (PST) **Backup recieved, I am extracting the information we need out it, will take 1-2hrs. Not sure on the exact date, about 1 month old. B3Kid 07:20, 20 February 2006 (PST) ***Good good, did we lose anything other than images? --Wilfred (talk| ) 13:17, 20 February 2006 (PST) February 15th *Due to a couple snags over the weekend, and insure minimal downtime the conversion took a little longer than expected, but I am happy to announce that NO data was lost, and there appear to be NO issues from the upgrade. Please test the site as much as you can, and if any problems surface please let me know. B3Kid 10:54, 15 February 2006 (PST) February 11th *I'm delighted to announce the opening of our Logo competition! As soon as the YoYoWiki has been updated I'd like to see this publicised on all the major forums (that allow links to the yoyowiki) to get in some artistic talent and get people talking about the yoyowiki. --Wilfred 02:55, 11 Feb 2006 (PST) Febuary 9th *Hey all, there will be updates going into the YoYoWiki this weekend. We will make a backup copy of the Database, but please expect the worst, and that there maybe possible downtime. We are going to keep the Wiki up and running live, while we install the upgrade to the production version(this version). Also I wanted to get the feel on peoples thoughts of free YoYoWiki.Org Email addresses. I'm not sure if its smart to offer a full email box solution, but fall back on a forwarder, since other places like hotmail, yahoo, and gmail offer such large accounts. There is a possibility that we could offer POP3 account access only as well. Leave your feed back on this, thanks! B3Kid 07:02, 9 Feb 2006 (PST) ** Ah, so you're the chap who keeps things up-to-date :-). Upgrading mediawiki to the latest version (1.4.14) should make things run smoother and will add a security fixes. The PHP here is a little out of date as well, but the newer versions only features bugfixes. I'm not that interested in a yoyowiki.org email, but I'd prefer just a forwarder if you do set it up to keep most of the space and bandwidth here for the wiki and its' videos/images. --Wilfred 08:37, 9 Feb 2006 (PST) *** Yeah that would be me, the never present B3Kid! I will admit that the YoYoWiki Updates, including the skin update, and interface update, have taken a back seat to everything life, I have not forgotten about the duties to keep things fresh! The project is slated to take place at 7pm Central time on Friday February 10th, and will be completed at 12pm central Sunday February 13th. If there are any questions, comments or concearns please let me know. B3Kid 13:59, 9 Feb 2006 (PST) February 7th * I can't get the 'thumb' tag to work on my pic of cut string on the string page. Help would be appreciated guys. * I once tried it and gave up as well. Are there any mediawiki gurus around? --HB 08:17, 7 Feb 2006 (PST) **Tragically there are no gurus around. I'll play around with it when I get a chance though. --Josh Parker 16:10, 7 Feb 2006 (PST) ***It seems to be .jpg images that don't want to be thumbnails, and .gif seems to place nice. Check out special:newimages --Wilfred 09:55, 8 Feb 2006 (PST) **Sigh... the tags don't work either. I've been tring to get some templates going and the official wikipedia ones use them but it seems we can't :-( --Wilfred 09:26, 8 Feb 2006 (PST) * Discussion about axle types moved to Talk:Axles January 25th * While I'm throwing out ideas, here's something I was thinking the wiki could be really helpful for. We currently have listings of placings for individual players, but what about contest results itself? The AYYA used to have a page which linked to results, but I don't think that survived the transition. Now, old results are in the middle of